Suggestions Archive - Race(s)
Stashed Chart Something about not being public domain The following chart is another interpretation of potential unrest. Thanks to Jarvinen for compiling this info. Race Pages If you have any background information about races, please post it here. MysticX2 (talk) 17:54, April 29, 2013 (UTC) :I threw in some minor edits for settlement placement. This varies a lot for different races so if anyone has insights to add to the race pages, I think this kind of information is important. Spearman D92-R (talk) 18:56, May 1, 2013 (UTC) ::Okay, so: Draconian and Lizardmen Settlers' primary use is establishing points of control early on islands you cannot reach without ships, so you can get to some valuable places earlier than your opponents. Note that Draconians have a nice tech tree and provide mana per population, so they're more benefical. DraconianSettlers can also fly, so they're faster and are good scouts. Dwarwen Settlers are always used in resource places. Groups of gems, silver, gold and areas with lots of mountains are nice. And where the crystals are present, especially CrysX, dwarwes are a must. A lone town with a little pop can yield more than a full-built city with all the mana buildings present. Dark Elven Settlers are mostly placed near Coal, Iron and Adamantium, since these are mostly troop-creators. This is also a good idea to set outposts at places with high pp cap, due to great amounts of power produced by each 1000 of the townsfolk. Troll Settlers should rarely be used - conquest is better for them. But placing your primary troop creation center will cheapen the construction cost, which is good for such a lowtech race as Trolls. Note that they can't even build Alchemist's Guild, so they will never be able to get magical, mythril or adamantium weapons. Beastmen Settlers are used just as usual, since they have a nice tech tree. Two notes should be taken, however: they produce power per pop, so you would want a place with high pop cap; they can create enginners, so you should build roads between their towns, perhaps, uniting enginners and settlers. Klackon Settlers are must for any empire with Klackon capital: due to special unrest, colonization becomes a primary growth way, so colonization rules are as usual. If your capital is not Klackon, then their settlers are useless pieces of junk for you, due to low tech and high unrest. High Men, Orcs and Nomad Settlers are placed as usual, except the benefit of Shores to their economical centers. High Elven Settlers are bad for business due to slow growth and not good enough tech, but, as with mana-pop productors, higher population cap locations should be chosen (beware the unrest though, but Rebels still produce the power). As for Gnolls and Halflings I fully agree with Spearman, but for Barbarians I should note the benefit of Shores (Warships, especially Flying and Invisible) and one special use: Barbarian Settlers are best used if you need to destroy some roads (how-to is written everywhere my Road Exploit intel is pasted). Did I forget something? Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 03:09, May 2, 2013 (UTC) :::Yes, I did: towns that can build oracles are good to place at borders of your empire. By the way, congrats on your lucky edit, Mind Stormy. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 05:30, May 2, 2013 (UTC) :::Thanks. Incidentally, if I have maximum choice in the matter, I prefer Dark Elves for most city sites and Trolls for my best military production center (assuming I'm running Death magic). Mind Stormy (talk) 07:19, May 2, 2013 (UTC) ::::That what I was talking about. You should only have one Troll city as the troop prod, to avoid getting low on cash. Dark Elves should be built anywhere if there is high pop cap. Dwarwes should be built as resource bases, and Draconians should be built by the Shores. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 13:55, May 2, 2013 (UTC) :::::Great ideas, thanks Spearman D92-R, Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (can I shorten that to Twilight or Princess?), and Mind Stormy. I'm counting on others to fix my errors! You should have lots of work. MysticX2 (talk) 12:54, May 2, 2013 (UTC) :::::I've gone ahead and edited several of the race-magic school synergy sections to point out genuine race-specific interactions rather than boilerplate that could apply to any race. This might not be possible for every single race-magic school pair, but it makes for more interesting reading when it is doable. Mind Stormy (talk) 10:26, May 5, 2013 (UTC) ::::::Thanks, I was hoping that it could be done...in fact I've left that realm section off of the Orcs page with the hope that one of you could add something. I couldn't think of anything, except the warship strategy. Any yes, I jumped a couple of races, but I have those almost ready. :D Thanks again, I appreciate all your work! MysticX2 (talk) 10:53, May 5, 2013 (UTC) ::::::Barbs and gnolls will need updating, then. Spearman D92-R (talk) 13:33, May 6, 2013 (UTC) :Yeah, those two were some of the last pages that Headrock did, but he had expressed some reservations about them, so yeah they should be updated to conform with the other race pages. Besides the charts and tables most of what I have done on the other pages is copy-and-pasted information and can be improved as needed. MysticX2 (talk) 09:57, May 7, 2013 (UTC) :: BTW thanks Twilight for that wall of text. It helps a lot to have a lot of the particulars right here and/or in the back of my head! Spearman D92-R (talk) 03:13, May 8, 2013 (UTC) :::Feel free to use any walls of text I post :) Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 12:34, May 8, 2013 (UTC) ::: I am not sure about elaborating so much on the combat stats of settlers. The pages all have a huge, extraneous write-up about how weak the settler units are, and no mention of their actual purpose. With Trolls I took the different angle of putting information on settlements in a subsection. If anyone has anything to add to it go ahead and write it in. I think the write-up on their combat capabilities could be condensed into 2-3 sentences. ::: –––Well hang on, it is unfair of me to say no mention, but I think 95% of their content should discuss where to plant cities. All the settler sections, including ones where I've added in particular notes, could be expanded, so have fun. Spearman D92-R (talk) 17:12, May 17, 2013 (UTC) ::::I like what you did with that, but I am torn between whether I like it better where you have it or if it would be better in the Citizen section. I probably did copy/paste too much about the settlers, and you have a good point about it being covered in depth on at least two other pages (at least one of which is where the info came from). I did most of my work on the race pages months ago, and I probably should have taken more time to review them before creating the page. That does leave LOTS of room for improvement edits! :D Keep up the good work! MysticX2 (talk) 01:35, May 18, 2013 (UTC) Dwarves Just double checked end-stage productivity for Dwarves (had done it a while ago for the Farmer page) and what is apparently going on with gold is that the marketplace does not interact with the racial tax bonus. For a tax rate of 2 I'm getting : + + = This gets confusing because the miners guild, sawmill, forest guild all definitely interact with the dwarf production and mineral bonuses. I haven't gotten around to looking at prosperity myself but Headrock's writeup seems pretty clear about how it would work. Spearman D92-R (talk) 16:54, May 20, 2013 (UTC) : No, it works as it should. Marketplace gives you + 50% gold bonus to all basic earnings from a city (taxes, diamonds, silver and gold ores). Since all basic earnings in Dwarf cities are doubled, you can say a Drarf city gives you twice as much gold. For example Dwarf city, 4 population, Marketplace, no river/shore/street bonus, no ores: *12 income if Tax rate is 1; 12 = 1.5 (market place) * 2 (dwarves) * 1 (tax per pop) * 4 (population) *24 income if Tax rate is 2; 24 = 1.5 (market place) * 2 (dwarves) * 2 (tax per pop) * 4 (population) : You probably got confused by a wrong calculation shown when you leftclick on the earings in the city screen. : ~ wiki contributor ::Earnings report gives the wrong numbers? that explains a great deal Spearman D92-R (talk) 18:33, May 20, 2013 (UTC) Trolls For some reason, when I pasted the info from my file into the page, spaces were added. It messed up some links and the appearance on the page, but I got a lot of them. It was odd because I used the same procedure as with the other races. Anyway, just a heads up on that. As with most other race pages, this needs intro information, background, and realm recommendations. MysticX2 (talk) 16:18, May 15, 2013 (UTC) The Trolls + Death realm recommendation writes itself... Pathfinding and Chaos Channels work nicely as well. Mind Stormy (talk) 17:23, May 15, 2013 (UTC) Oh yeah, Alchemy + Warlord is almost mandatory with them... Mind Stormy (talk) 17:27, May 15, 2013 (UTC) :Put in the background stuff I had. It also occurred to me at some point that retorts deserve a lot of attention in the realm interractions. Spearman D92-R (talk) 01:05, May 16, 2013 (UTC) ::Regarding the mainline fighters, I'm confused about the negativity toward Troll Swordsmen. The difference between Troll Swordsmen and Troll Halberdiers is so small that it should almost always be better to build the former and use the saved resources to unlock War Trolls earlier; whereas the edge Troll Swordsmen have over Troll Spearmen is more significant. Mind Stormy (talk) 06:13, May 18, 2013 (UTC) :::You have a point, in my games using Trolls I have stuck with spearmen as long as possible, but I don't think I've ever built a troll halberdier. I'm not sure what you mean about all the negativity though, is that on the Troll page or the troll swordsman page? I did see one statement that should probably be changed on the Troll page. I think the troll swordsmen, like all others, have even better defense than halberdiers against ranged attacks...which is the main reason I build swordsmen. MysticX2 (talk) 11:59, May 18, 2013 (UTC) :::: I made some remarks about the spears being the most cost-effective of the three, since they have the essentials. I'm not sure how to respond, though, since I think we're both correct. Spearman D92-R (talk) 15:35, May 18, 2013 (UTC) It appears that the Trolls page is possessed! Today I removed spacing that I'm sure wasn't there before, and I don't see where it was added (it appears that Spearman is given the credit for adding those, but they were added in a section that he wasn't editing so I'm sure they weren't intended). Just another heads up. MysticX2 (talk) 09:01, May 20, 2013 (UTC) Ok, from what I can tell, templates on the Trolls page are not working correctly and are causing the unintended edits. It looks like the template problem started after I added the categories to the page, so I don't know if that was the original problem with spacing or not. MysticX2 (talk) 09:38, May 20, 2013 (UTC) :Note the size of the page in the history. Apparently when you made the Adding Categories edit, you also added 40,000 bytes worth of text and formatting (did you?? seems a lot of work for no noticeable change!) I just experimented by adding dwarves to their categories, and the result only added 66 bytes. Spearman D92-R (talk) 11:54, May 20, 2013 (UTC) ::Yeah, I saw that, it turned the templates into the code for them which added the extra bytes. But the page has had it's problems from the start. MysticX2 (talk) 12:28, May 20, 2013 (UTC) :::Regenerating nasties on the Trolls page. Go figure. Mind Stormy (talk) 16:02, May 20, 2013 (UTC) ::::They are trolling us, no doubt about it. Spearman D92-R (talk) 16:59, May 20, 2013 (UTC) :::LOL, I was just going to say they were being true to their name...but you two have better ones. At the moment the only thing I can think of is to delete the page and try again. Regarding the categories, I didn't add those using the edit button at the top of the page (I used the add category button at the bottom of the page). I added all three categories with one click, well two actually. It's too bad preview doesn't look like the info in history. Any suggestions? MysticX2 (talk) 17:53, May 20, 2013 (UTC) ::::It needs help because as things stand, the source editing field can take an age to open as it loads in all the junk. Just sux. Is there a way you could back up to a cleaner version of the page and paste all the content from newer edits? Also I don't know if you have been using a rich text editor to store pages on your drive but try to stick with notepad, so nothing tries to "intelligently" insert carriage returns or extra information. Spearman D92-R (talk) 19:09, May 20, 2013 (UTC) I'm at Community Central asking for help. Have a few to chat? MysticX2 (talk) 19:13, May 20, 2013 (UTC) Ok, it seems that deleting and reloading the info is about the only option. I'll try to make sure I have everything, delete the page and wait for the bots to clear it (likely a day)...then re-enter the info. MysticX2 (talk) 19:31, May 20, 2013 (UTC) :I've written all the changes I found using the history and I've deleted the page. I also checked by posting my file on the sandbox page to insure there weren't any ghosts. :) Now we wait until tomorrow. MysticX2 (talk) 12:47, May 21, 2013 (UTC) ::The replacement page is up for the Trolls. It is ready for any additional information, corrections, and Realm advice. If you make more than one edit it might be a good idea to check the history to see that the page didn't have something odd happen, like added spaces or turning templates into code. For now it seems to be ok. MysticX2 (talk) 12:25, May 22, 2013 (UTC) ::: Great work man. Nice and clean now! We'll be careful :) Spearman D92-R (talk) 12:48, May 22, 2013 (UTC) ::::I meant to respond here because I used my exact same file, except that I made the minor changes and copy/pasted the additional information into it before deleting the original page. The suggestion that Firefox doesn't like certain things may have been at least part of the problem. I've noticed some difficulty when I try to make edits when bots are busy too, so timing may have actually played a part. Anyway, it's good to have a good clean page. :D MysticX2 (talk) 09:03, May 25, 2013 (UTC) Orcs Any suggestions for the Orc realm info or background information? MysticX2 (talk) 09:59, May 7, 2013 (UTC) :I can probably work on them soon. If you get the basic pages up and don't object, I can try to write more specific content. Anyone else can, too, if they want, but I sort of like doing that part. I take it headrock's philosophy on this was something like how people don't want to just see a skeletal page with little on it except (to use a current favorite word) boilerplate... but rather to see something fleshed out, specific, and hopefully interesting. Like when I made small writeups for the wizards, I tried to sort of advertise the wizard as a personality that could be interesting to play. I think you've made a fine start on orcs— like everyone says, they're normal. Very, very normal :D Spearman D92-R (talk) 03:04, May 8, 2013 (UTC) ::Yeah, I should have all those up in the next few days. There is one other, unrelated, page that I have worked on and I'll try to get that up as well. I am trying to get things rolling, but anything I have written will likely need improving! Keep up the good work! MysticX2 (talk) 09:36, May 8, 2013 (UTC) Halflings I'm trying to think of what to emphasize in the Realms section of the Halflings page. I'd rather mention things other than Slingers, but those are huge for the Halflings. Any suggestions? MysticX2 (talk) 19:33, April 17, 2013 (UTC) :Well, what are notable halflings' traits in MoM? Slingers, lowly units that have Lucky and thus can do more than their counterparts of other races, food production, little to none unrest modifiers. I think these should be mentioned. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 01:42, April 18, 2013 (UTC) ::Yeah, the eight figure units and food production were the two main things that I could think of.MysticX2 (talk) 17:53, April 18, 2013 (UTC) :::Before I go any further, what did you think of my change to the sorcery section? MysticX2 (talk) 15:43, April 20, 2013 (UTC) ::::Well, these are still common realm advices which are mostly unrelated to halfling's special traits. Surely you would expect any given blue book wielder to go for Time Stop, Suppress Magic (though this one's buggy), Sky Drake and such. In my opinion, only special race trait + magic realm trait interractions and combinations should be noted on race's page. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 02:18, April 21, 2013 (UTC) :::Doh! You're right! MysticX2 (talk) 21:09, April 21, 2013 (UTC) :::The only thing I come up with is Blur and Invisible to enhance the Halflings lucky trait. The thing is that while thinking about this, it seems that almost anything that can be said about one race will also apply to 8 or 10 other races. I'm thinking that may be why Headrock left the realms section off the Gnolls page.MysticX2 (talk) 09:26, April 22, 2013 (UTC) ::::Well, there are few sorcery interactions there, so that's justified a little. You could write something like "Lionheart, Holy Weapon and Crusade are good for boosting Slingers", "Making undead out of halflings is benefical due to Lucky trait (and Slingers' high upkeep), and you can use Dark Rituals more freely because of no unrest penalty of Halflings", "Chaos Channel is great to use on Slingers because of the free flight it provides (has a great use versus Great Wyrms and large hordes of ground enemy Slingers have trouble dealing with), and because chaos channeled Slingers will benefit from Chaos boost spells like Warp Reality", "Flight is great to cast on Slingers (explained above) and Phantom Warriors make a great meat shield for them if enemy has got ranged attackers". Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 13:01, April 22, 2013 (UTC) Thank you Spearman, another fine job!! MysticX2 (talk) 09:59, May 1, 2013 (UTC) :Thanks mate. Spearman D92-R (talk) 14:44, May 1, 2013 (UTC) High Elves Need background information and to write the realm info. MysticX2 (talk) 17:54, April 29, 2013 (UTC) :Thank you for the corrections Mind Stormy! MysticX2 (talk) 09:59, May 1, 2013 (UTC) ::Ah, by the way, forgot to mention in our discussion: Berserk spell benefit applies to Elven Lords just as it applies to Paladins. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 11:42, May 1, 2013 (UTC) :::Yeah, sorry, that was from the day I wasn't taking notes. :p I'll work it into the section, if someone else doesn't beforehand. MysticX2 (talk) 18:35, May 1, 2013 (UTC) High Men Need background information and improved realm information. Also, I'd like to know if you think the page looks better with the units listed under Force Composition indented as on the Halflings page or not indented as on the High Men page. MysticX2 (talk) 13:14, May 2, 2013 (UTC) :Not the full range of what we were discussing on realm interactions a day ago, but that probably is going to be added. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 13:57, May 2, 2013 (UTC) :For the magic school synergies section, I'd say High Men are one of the best pairings with Death since (i) they already get Holy Bonus 1 from Paladins, (ii) they already get Healing from Priests, (iii) they have Cathedrals to max out the Dark Rituals bonus, and the full suite of happiness boosting buildings to minimize the drawback, and (iv) Paladins are one of the best normal unit targets for Berserk (only Elven Lords seem better to me). Mind Stormy (talk) 14:19, May 2, 2013 (UTC) :Incidentally, I would *not* characterize High Men as the most "normal" race with no "great advantages". That distinction belongs to Orcs. Paladins are without a doubt an abnormally good "normal unit". Mind Stormy (talk) 11:59, May 3, 2013 (UTC) Races page I've been looking at the individual race pages, Barbarians, Gnolls, etc., and I'm thinking that the Society section would make a good article on the Races page. The Races currently has the copy of the normal units from the main page which is what I think those Society sections should replace. The other information can be updated and I am leaning toward using the Unrest chart from the Fortress page instead of the one that is currently on the Races page, mainly because of potential copyright issue and because I'm not sure if those '1's are as accurate as the percentages. I'm moving the section from below to here for that reason too. Thoughts or suggestions? MysticX2 (talk) 21:20, July 3, 2013 (UTC) :I'm not sure I understand. By "Society" for the generic page what do you have in mind? Certainly not copy-and-pasting 14 sections from the individual race pages. Also I think doing some verifications on the racial tensions will remove whatever copyright issues. Spearman D92-R (talk) 00:47, July 4, 2013 (UTC) ::That is exactly what I was looking at doing (and I have copied them). After reading all 14 of them I think they will fit nicely on the Races page to replace that copy of the normal units from the main page. I think that section gives an interesting insight into each race and will give people something to think about when choosing a race. The rest of the page will take care of the additional basic information that should be on the page. It will certainly be an improvement on what is there! ::The idea is that those sections give an overview of each race and will work as a portal to the individual race pages. The page should be, after all, a summary page with insights into the races. :D MysticX2 (talk) 01:41, July 4, 2013 (UTC) ::As for the unrest chart, I think percentages are going to better indicate the tension caused, but as you say even that will need to have some verifications (percentages versus count). MysticX2 (talk) 01:25, July 4, 2013 (UTC) ::: Alright, I have a couple remarks then. First I'm glad you think the blurbs are worth copying! That said, I think that it is too much text for one page, and it is not to-the-point. Descriptions should give flavor to the page, not dominate it. Let me whip up some shorter remarks for the Races page itself (maybe focusing mostly on relations and context) and see what you think of that instead?? ::: Also, I am not committed to what I wrote as being final. I might make serious revisions, to make them a bit more matter-of-fact, e.g., more in line with the Barbarians description. Headrock could even suddenly come back and change them. ::: If you or anyone has criticism, different ideas, or revisions, that would be great. Furthermore the race pages need structuring. I'd like to think over a final format for the pages to follow, so we can get in more of the information that needs to be where it needs to be, rather than haphazardly sprinkling it around various sections. ::: Spearman D92-R (talk) 05:21, July 4, 2013 (UTC) ::I know I've said before, I always like what someone else has written and I seldom like what I have written. In the case of the Races page, the task is to give an overview of 14 races which is going to necessitate a fair amount of text, thus dominating the page, and while there is usually room for improvement I don't think that the text has to be more to-the-point; although I am certainly interested in seeing what you have in mind with focusing mostly on relations and context (I hate to keep burdening you with these things). ::By the race pages need structuring, do you mean the Barbarians, Gnolls, etc.? As for a final format for pages to follow, that works well when the subject of the pages is related...I struggled with that on the Normal Units page which I'm still trying to work that out (suggestions welcome). I've noticed a number of instances where information has been presented when it is already included on the page...just not in the part that was read, so yeah there is definitely room for improvement. And, if he does suddenly come back there will be nobody happier than me, after all he told me a number of times that he could fix anything I did. :p I would like to get some useful information on some key pages in a way that doesn't look haphazard or elementary. I've been more focused on pages that have red links on the main page, but I have been distracted by other issues too. MysticX2 (talk) 10:23, July 4, 2013 (UTC) ::: Don't worry, I definitely don't mind giving you something to work with for Races. That's where I am these days. Can't do it quite yet, 4th of July parties etc... Spearman D92-R (talk) 21:36, July 4, 2013 (UTC) race chart I've adapted the chart that I used on the Normal Unit page to add information from the Races page: I left the Normal Unit information in because of the apparent confusion when someone added regeneration to the original chart, even though it doesn't apply to citizens. My question is should the chart be placed as above, adapted without certain columns, or some other improvements? MysticX2 (talk) 12:14, July 7, 2013 (UTC) Or is this better? Thoughts or suggestions? MysticX2 (talk) 12:53, July 7, 2013 (UTC) :I think the chart with Workers and Farmers in separate columns looks better. Everything else is very nice. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 17:00, July 7, 2013 (UTC) ::Ok, I guess that is the one I will use then. It can be replaced if necessary. Thanks for your input. MysticX2 (talk) 08:25, July 8, 2013 (UTC) Race pages need structuring Summary of unresolved things off the top of my head. I may answer some or all of these in my own head, but if you have suggestions, shoot. * What, exactly, goes into the introduction? And I mean exactly. * What is the difference between the army and force composition sections? * I want to have small charts for comparing citizen productivity (see them at Dwarves or Nomads); should these go in citizens or technology? Do they seem useful? * What is, or should be, the difference between the citizens and technology sections anyway? * Where should info on placing settlers go? * Retort recommendations appear to be going into the intro of the magic section. I guess this is fine unless there are objections * Descriptions of the units should be shorter and summarize their strategic role, rather than their statistics (which are already plain to see). It isn't terribly necessary to state in text that something costs , needs an armory, and has + maintenance if the data is already charted. It is more interesting to offer the big picture of when you might want to pursue the unit, and when not. Spearman D92-R (talk) 21:36, July 4, 2013 (UTC) *To give you exactly what goes into the intro will take some thought for me to put it into words, so stay tuned. *Looking at the force composition section, I guess I really used a stale approach. As I try to explain, I end up saying almost the same thing about each one...so I need to give this more thought. *I think charts are almost always useful, and I like the ones you linked to. Those seem to fit well in the citizen section. *I think the difference between the citizens and the technology is simply what a race can do or the benefits gained as a result of its citizens; or technology which is basically what a race can do or the benefits gained as a result of the buildings that race can build. *Info on placing settlers probably works best (currently) in the force:settler section, since it is specific to that unit I don't see any reason to make someone look further down the page just because it isn't technically the same as anything else being discussed in the section. *Yeah, retorts fit with the magic section. *Yeah, like I said above I really used a stale approach and you are entirely correct! I'll try to give you better answers as I can. :D MysticX2 (talk) 01:15, July 5, 2013 (UTC) I'll attempt to express what goes into the intro now, based on most of the pages on the wiki, the page should first offer a brief expression or definition of what the page is about. Next, the page should have a summary of how the race (in the case of race pages) fits in Master of Magic and the plane they originate from. This is not the same as the interracial tensions, but it can be related. Then the page should give an interesting detail or two that distinguishes the race from other races. Does that sound right? Again, based on what I can infer, the Army section is a summary of the Force and should emphasize a few of the strengths or abilities of a race...and even weaknesses that should be considered. The Force Composition is an overview of all the available units with an introduction that offers a reasonable recommendation for garrisoning or for conquering surrounding areas. I guess the short definition of Force Composition would be how to use each Normal Unit of that race. Does that seem right? MysticX2 (talk) 09:50, July 5, 2013 (UTC) Well, I think all your ideas are nice, especially advices on racial Settlers' use - it fits that place best. And basic advices on each unit's use and role are nice. Though, in MoM units tend to be used in a non-standart way, but that's the only downside to your suggestions. Well, would be nice to take a look after you implement these. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 16:46, July 5, 2013 (UTC) : Thanks very much for the input. I'll see about the races page and then get back on this. Spearman D92-R (talk) 22:27, July 5, 2013 (UTC) ::I'm still not liking the Races and Units section because it seems to me to emphasize Normal Units and doesn't really belong on the Races page...in fact that might have been a good section to have on the Normal Unit page. MysticX2 (talk) 00:12, July 7, 2013 (UTC) ::: Fine by me. I just sectioned it off because it was capturing the table of contents and looked even stranger. Spearman D92-R (talk) 00:26, July 7, 2013 (UTC) ::Did you, or anyone else, have an opinion as to its relevance on the Races page? MysticX2 (talk) 00:32, July 7, 2013 (UTC) Nice races background info, Spearman, keep it up! Though, it lacks some information on Draconian and Lizardmen dominating the early expansion because of Flying or Water Walking settlers. So they can set up on some remote areas earlier, which is especially useful at Small land size games. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 16:49, July 7, 2013 (UTC) Spearman, don't let any of my updates to the page interfere with what you are doing...feel free to replace any or all of my changes. MysticX2 (talk) 09:17, July 8, 2013 (UTC) I really hope I didn't mess up any plans. MysticX2 (talk) 00:20, July 9, 2013 (UTC)